click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20120929
20121007
STATION
CNN 6
CNNW 6
MSNBC 6
MSNBCW 6
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 2
CNBC 1
LANGUAGE
English 38
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)
the attack that killed ambassador stevens and three other americans. for example, they say that ambassador stevens used to jog almost daily, frequently with his security detail. but that the -- according to their sources they say, a pro-gadhafi facebook website posted a stacked photo of stevens and also a threat against him. so he stopped temporarily stopped for about a week. and then he went back again. here's what congressman daryl issa tells cnn. >> all indications are the ambassador was not reckless and took the advice always of his security forces including sometimes when they said meetings needed to be canceled. so i think this is a failure of intelligence, a failure of security and a failure of judgment. but not of the now-deceased ambassador. >> and, wolf, there are other incidents in fact we've been reporting on them all along that they note. one was an assailant blowing a hole in the security perimeter at the north gate of the benghazi mission tworks rocket propelled grenade rounds were fired at the benghazi office of the red cross. and finally the most serious probably was other
attack on ambassador christopher stevens. last night stewart went to town. >> so the administration's story was anti-muslim video on youtube touched off a massive protest on vend to spread quickly to 27 other places. seems implausible, but two days later, they had an explanation for that, two. >> our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was, in fact, initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. almost a copy cat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo which were prompted, of course, by the video. >> copy cats. [ laughter ] libya wasn't the ring. it was the ring 2. [ laughter ] five days after the attack, the white house was still sticking to the video story. on the eighth day, the director of national counter terrorism center went in front of congress with a slightly different assessment. >> i would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. >> of course, he's going to say it was a terrorist attack. he runs the counterterrorism center. a cynic would argue the president has been unwi
lincoln and steven douglas. they were part of the race for one of illinois's two senate seats. lincoln lost the debates and elections, but the conversations launched him into national prominence and lincoln went on to become one of the the greatest presidents today. what if that's what got him killed, changing the course of the nation? the next guest tells the story of an assassination plot wider and far more sinister than we imagined. joining us is timothy o'brien, the executive editor of the huffington post and the author of "the lincoln conspiracy." >> it's great to be here, s.e. >> i love alternative history and the kinds of things eric larson does with history. this is a combination of history and fiction. tell me, was this a conspiracy you actually believe in? do you think think this is what happened or did you dream this up to sort of enhance a novelistic new version of history? >> lincoln conspiracy is a historical thriller about this incredible moment of change after the lincoln assassination and the industrialization of america and cities and society and ferment. and the assa
is an absolute mess. i think -- i've heard stuart stevens as saying let's focus on the economy. i think stuart stevens is exactly right. americans don't care as much in the polls about foreign policy. but several weeks later after this, i think it's very legitimate now that the press is going in and a couple of weeks have passed since the ambassador's death, now, yes. i mean, he's got a responsibility to talk about how badly the white house bungled this. >> i think he does. and indeed, you know, i think right now, the focus is a little misplaced. the notion that -- i think the white house is pretty credible in saying that they're learning more, that their initial instiblgt -- they didn't know the situation was initially, that they've explained it better as they've done intelligence assessments, but it raises the more fundamental question which is why was the consulate not secure? how was it that security issues, as opposed to their stories afterward, these are american lives at stake in an unstable region, what are the intelligence failures? what were the security failures? those are fundament
stevens. what do you make of the pictures you see of what arwa's talking about? >> as i listen to arwa, it just reinforces what we said last week and we've said from the beginning. investigators have to go there, even if you didn't have all the physical evidence there that arwa just described to our viewers, you would want to know from the witness interviews, anderson, you would want to know measurements, you would want to be able to take people through it to really understand what the dynamic was. but then you see things like handprints and blood samples. one of the things, the first thing you would do, i'll give you an example, that is you would take the blood sample off the toilet and the bidet and see whether or not it matched first to the ambassador's. did he fall? there's all sorts of things you would want to know. you know, the pictures we've seen publicly of his body doesn't look like he did, but you don't know. and all those sorts of bits of information, it is true, it would be a less valuable crime scene now because people have rifled through it, but there's always some value
will hold a meeting to talk about what killed ambassador chris stevens. the timing is interesting because congress is out of town. congressm >>. >> mitt romney said he would not overturn president obama's executive order that granted temporary work permits for dreamers, children brought to the u.s. by illegal immigrants. this isn't the only area where the candidates agree on immigration. richard lui is here with where they stand. >> are the candidates the same or different on immigration? "no real differences between presidential candidates on immigration." "obama versus romney, 101, five ways they differ on immigration." president obama's deferred action plan for immigrants in the u.s. illegally or without authorization. today governor romney says he would continue it. 1.7 million unauthorized immigrants under 31 could benefit from this potentially staying two years with work authorization, as well. that is a lighter version of the dream act which would give permanent residency. the president stalled the president's effort in 2010. romney saying he would veto it saying he would grant leg
documents scattered on the floors, including evacuation plans in case of attack, ambassador stevens' schedule and the names of libyan nationals working for the consulate, all lying in the open unsecured. the investigators have remained in tripoli hundreds of miles away from benghazi because of safety concerns and libyan contractors say they have not been contracted by the libyan or american governments. the post reports the only security at the compound is two private guards paid for by the landlord. larry, back to you. >> wow, great stuff. i turn back to the kudlow caucus for a quick whip around on this subject. is the benghazi couatastrophe going to become a big issue in this campaign? >> i think it dents president obama's reputation as an international leader. i think ambassador rice got it completely wrong trying to cover up perhaps what really happened here and trying to blame it on a video that we now know is clearly not the reason why they had this -- >> you know, this thing is not redounding to the president's credit. he calls it a bump in the road. a very well liked ambassa
, people like stewart stevens and beth myers took a lot of heat over the last couple months about the campaign, but those -- i have worked with stuart before in many campaigns and he's a debate preparation fanatic and they understood that this would be an opportunity to shift the gears, to reframe the race, and one guy showed up and one guy prepared, and it showed. it really did. you know, a lot of people were saying it's the best since reagan. reagan had some natural gifts and was an affable guy. i think in terms of preparation, this may be one of the best presidential debate performances ever. >> i agree. totally amoral, apolitical sense, i agree with you. steve, what do you think happened to obama? >> i think he prepared and showed up for a news conference, not a debate. he answered the questions -- >> but there weren't any questions. lehrer didn't see it as his role -- >> we can talk about lehrer separately. i think what they were trying to accomplish is their view was the mitt romney campaign wasn't going very well, mitt romney wasn't doing a particularly good job and they wo
killed foubenghazi that killed our ambassador chris stevens and others. the this is mike rogers, listen. >> i argued the administration made serious mistakes whether they highlighted the video, escalated its credibility to the presidential level and then took it on tv in pakistan with u.s. taxpayer dollars. i think those were all serious mistakes that we are paying the price for, and it was because of that view of what they thought their intelligence, at least what they wanted it to be, not what it was. bill: two critical things he said in this. i want to talk to new york congressman peter king about it, the chairman of the homeland security committee. good morning, sir. >> good morning, bill. bill: they highlighted the video escalating the credibility on the presidential level. what do you think of that? >> i a agree fully with chairman rogers. i'm on the intelligence committee with mike, he's a great chairman. he's been right on this from the start. the president took something which was a petty issue and elevated it, gave it a credibility it didn't deserve, somehow put it on defense
as a threat from london and from other cities around the world. >> steven johnson is our guest sunday taking your calls, e-mails and tweets on in depth. the author will look at sites history, the cyber world, popular culture in computer networking and politics. live at noon eastern on booktv on c-span2. >> this is the first parish church in brunswick maine, and its significance to the story of uncle tom's cabin is that in many ways the story began you. is here in this q., q. number 23, that harriet beecher stowe, by her account, saw a vision of uncle tom being whipped to death. now, uncle tom as you probably know as the title character of the hero of her 1852 novel, uncle tom's cabin. uncle tom's cabin was written very much as a protest novel, by anyone in the north, take a in knowing what all abolitionists lived, if anyone in the north was to aid or abet a fugitive slave, they themselves would be imprisoned or fined for breaking the law. and this was the bill which was seen as kind of the compromise between the north and south to avoid war. so that was part of what the novel was trying to d
christopher stevens and three others. these images echo the worst -- the recall those moments in 1979 with the taking of american hostages at the embassy in iran. u.s. taxpayers as an enormous 1.6 billion doris to egypt, -- $1.6 billion to egypt, which is now run by a former member of the muslim brotherhood. should the u.s. give up foreign aid to these nations, mr. sadler? >> no. not now, we have a fledgling government being formed a. with egypt withholding funds, the editorial board agreed is time for us to stop the old on that aid. it is in our best interests to stay involved. if we do not stay involved, russia, china, and other countries with in this world will i do not think to cut off the aid. >> mr. cruz? >> this is another area of clear disagreement. we should not be funding those who are contrary to our interest. the only justification for continuing that aid or any portion of it is it to protect national security interests of the united states. we should use that aid as extensive leverage to protect national security interest. we should not be writing a blank check. lookit th
a question here? way, way in the back, is there a microphone in that last row there? >> steven call, university of maryland. is it important for the united states to abide by international law and liberal international order and is there a way the united states could use military force against iran's nuclear program without u.n. approval and be in compliance with international law? >> who wants to take that? want to take it. >> i will take it but don't want to be droning on and on. >> then speak briefly. >> i will speak briefly. the united states, first of all, you know you can go through a lot of presidents going back to including bill clinton obviously who took military action in kosovo in that case without a u.n. security council mandate and, barack obama ran and says repeatedly that he does not consider the united states bound by to pursue its interests bound by u.n. security council resolutions. merge has i would say am by lept attitude toward international law. we are in some respects the greatest spokesman sometimes for international law but throughout our history and through
in a region where it's been very volatile. these are bureaucratic decisions. and ambassador stevens made the decision to go to benghazi. what problem may emerge here, he went to benghazi with inadequate security. we have to understand that our embassies are not protected and our ambassadors are not protected by the marines or by u.s. personnel all the time. they're protected by the local government officials that provide that security. and chris was known as someone who didn't like the envelope of security around him. i think the real issue here is not so much whether or not the president or the administration was at fault, but whether or not the senior management level at the state department did not do their job adequately to make sure that chris was adequately protected going into a zone that was clearly -- all of us knew was dangerous from the get go. after all, the british ambassador had just come under attack in benghazi a month and a half before chris lost his life >> yes. how do americans separate the facts from politics though, mark, in these kinds of situations from either side
-- you can join the conversation on twitter, facebook or send us an e-mail at journal@cspan.org. steven haze has this editorial. talking about the attacks and libya. joe is on the phone on the republican line. our third party is still relevant? caller: no. ross perot had a wonderful opportunity to open up people's mines and he talked about things. the problem with that is he is a billionaire just like everybody else. it was a business decision. at the end of the day he is back to eric -- back to making money or the rest of us have to decide whether we can pay house note, carnot, pay for our kid's education just to get through the day. if he were serious about a third party, then he should have stayed there to have a third party. i voted the man not the party. when i look at what mr. romney is doing and mr. ryan is doing as opposed to what i already know about president obama, i am proud of him -- the things he is talking about as opposed to what they are talking about is about the rich getting richer as opposed to all of us being in this together. i do not have a problem paying more tax
and setting up a series of public health initiatives for basically eliminating cholera as a threat. >> steven johnson is our guest depth."ay on 'in- he will get popular culture and computer networking and politics, i've at noon eastern on "book tv." journal"ington continues. host: james montoya is our guest. what is the college board? guest: a membership organization of over 6000 educational institution knows, organizations that are all focused on connecting students to college success. host: and the purpose of the s.a.t.? when it was first created? guest: the s.a.t. has been around for decades. the idea was to create a more level playing field for students, but sickly for those that lived in axa's that might not have access to the interview campus. it provided an opportunity for us nationally to have an examination that all colleges could use to help them in the admissions process. host: there are now three sections of it. guest: the third section is been in place about eight years. the s.a.t. is measuring those skills that are necessary for college success -- reading, writing, and mathemati
, brooke. >> with the assassination of chris stevens, u.s. ambassador, looks like that could be an issue in the election. should mitt romney make it one? >> that's the question, brooke. as you know politico's done some great reporting as there's real tension in the romney camp as to capitalize on the issue or just stay on the economy. it's the economy, stupid. but obviously the attack in libya has become a hugely politicized issue. you can see it from both sides. today the chairman of the house oversight committee came out with a letter saying that the united states government had denied repeated requests for more security at the consulate in benghazi and listing 13 incidents that had happened over the past six months that he thinks were warning signs that were ignored. so he's going ahead with that. and he's going to bring congress back to have hearings next week on this issue. no question this has become a political issue and in terms of hearings, coming at a very bad time for president obama and the democrats. >> something to look for possibly if not tomorrow night in denver in that d
to come to these things. you took a murky topic and made it clear. as the attorney of steven colbert, will he use that money to try to win the emmy from jon stewart? my real question is -- it is difficult to change. this is a time when things are so polarized. with new technology where everybody has their own axe to grind, address that as a dissuading factor. if i go home tonight, i can do whatever i want to as many people as i can reach. that is different from the time of jefferson. ben franklin are someone only needed to set that in print and now all you need to is to press a button. how does that fit into a campaign? >> obama cannot raise the money without technology. the net is different from a newspaper. you can say whatever you want an infinite number of people can read that. no one will know you wrote that unless you put money behind it or have a way of promoting it. there are similar barriers. you cannot say you're printing press is as important as someone else's printing press. it is more complicated. >> question surprised me. going to say we took a simple subject and made
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)